School of Two Thousand Smiles–Chapter Twenty Seven

NURTURING FREE THINKING

SAM

Patria began the afternoon session with a lively talk about education itself. “We will often come back to the I – Thou, but now I want to talk about education and why Dr. Haloran and others began this kind of school. I want to start with a simple question. You don’t need to answer it out loud. Think about this question: Did the school you went to encourage you to think for yourself? Four nodded in the affirmative, and one of the four said, “I went to Two Thousand Smiles.” The other three said they went to similar schools. The seven others shook their heads vigorously: well, all but Jack Ross, who simply nodded. “Most people say at first, how well they learned what the assigned books and the teachers told them was the correct way to think, and then they would realize that they were really told what and how to think.

For most of human history, only a few people were educated. Priests and ministers were educated by religionists, among the few who could read. Outside religious circles, the wealthy and ruling class folks, and they hired teachers for their own families. Ordinary people learned by simply living, and that did not include reading. Universal schooling — education for everyone — is a very recent idea, only a couple of hundred years old. It began with hope but was shaped by fear. When governments created mass education, they wanted educated citizens — but they also wanted order, predictability, and control. So, schools were designed not just to awaken minds, but to manage them.” Patria gracefully and gently went to the whiteboard and picked up an erasable dry marker. “Look at how most schools work…” She wrote and said, “Bells decide when you move. “Below that, “Schedules decide what matters most.” Then, “One voice speaks, many listen.” Then, “Answers are graded and compared.”

Patria sat back down in the circle and said gently but with authority, “None of this is cruel by itself, but none of it was created to help you discover your own inner authority. Up until recently, nearly all education was established to teach children what various authorities - religious, political parties, labor leaders, and others- wanted them to learn. There were always educators who believed children are naturally curious and learn best through experience. But those ideas were slow and messy — and hard to measure. Efficiency won. Control replaced trust. Independent thinking didn’t disappear; it just became inconvenient. Factories needed people who followed instructions and didn’t ask too many questions. Schools began to look like factories because factories paid the bills. Independent thinking wasn’t forbidden. It was labeled ‘disruptive.’ Human consciousness, more particularly student consciousness, was expanded – but only as much as the establishment, i.e., the government, political, religious, and traditional authorities, allowed.

“By the mid-20th century, fear tightened everything. Fear of being different. Fear of falling behind. Fear of thinking the wrong thing. Students learned an unspoken lesson: Don’t think too deeply or too differently — it slows things down. Here’s the key point. Independent thinking was never removed from education. It was postponed. We were told, “Later.” “After the test.” “After graduation.” But a mind that waits too long for permission often forgets it ever had it. Let me be clear: Independent thinking does not mean rebellion or disrespect. It means listening carefully, questioning gently, holding uncertainty, and choosing kindness even when no one is watching. Fear cannot teach a person to think. It can only teach them to comply. So, at our schools, we’ll end with one question. What kind of thinker do you want to become — now? We believe that the world does not need more obedient people. It needs people who can think clearly, feel deeply, and act with compassion. We, you and I, were born with that ability. Education should help you remember it — not train you to forget.”

Throughout the talk, Patria stood, walked around, even danced, gracefully sat back down,  got back up, and generally kept the little audience awake with her gentle conviction and quiet authority.  She glanced at her watch and nearly shouted, “Wow, I’m sorry. I don’t think I’ve ever preached like that before. I think I am reacting to the reports of hurt, depression, suicides, and negative behavior heaped on children and teens. So, t thank you for listening.” This time, she was given a round of applause when she sat down.

I got up and said, “And, Patria, I’ll add my ‘Wow’ to yours. That was a wonderful speech, and I’m sure you want our audience here to know that we never, ever, want our facilitators or teachers to lecture our students but to engage with them. So, Patria, why did you decide to lecture us?” I’m sure I asked this in a way that showed her I was not displeased with her. She responded that she was reacting to the many reports of suicide, depression, child abuse, and hurt that are reported, and that millions of children and adolescents have no nurturing haven to go to. Home, always somewhat limited, became even more so because both parents are working.  Home was no longer  ‘home’.

One after another, applicants told Patria that they really liked her impassioned presentation and wanted copies of it. Even Jack Ross wanted a copy and added, “I’m really glad you gave us that speech, Dr. Otieno. You gave me a very scholarly reason for why you all have created schools that nurture students' free and creative thinking. I’m looking forward to learning how you do that, or at least attempt to do it. I’m still a bit doubtful.“

I stood up and said, “And with that, we’ll break for today and look forward to seeing you tomorrow at 9:00.”